
-------- TML Message #752 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 752
From: wrgate.wr.tek.com!reed.UUCP!oresoft.uu.net!richard@tektronix.TEK.COM (Richard The Writer)
Subject: Galactic scale
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 89 10:11:45 PDT


I found this in sci.physics and thought it would be of *enormous*
interest, especially to those who are contemplating maps...
	Richard

- --------------------------------
Subject: Relative distances and sizes in the Universe.

        Several weeks ago I posted a request for slide sets comparing the 
    relative distances in the solar system and the other stars:  It would 
    seem that slide sets of this scale system are rather hard to come by.  
    I sent out a request to several other computer networks, along with 
    calling a number of planetariums, museum stores, and searched through 
    various scientific catalogues, all without significant result.  

        I was able to use my resources and gather some information
    from several friends on various types of relative celestial scales, 
    and have come up with some relevant information.

        The first selection depicts the solar system on a major league
    baseball field from E. C. Slipher's "Planet" section of THE WORLD BOOK
    ENCYCLOPEDIA P, VOLUME 15, Field Enterprises Educational Corporation,
    Chicago, Illinois, 1964.  If the Sun were the size of a United States 
    half-dollar (fifty cents) on home plate, the planet Mercury would be 
    120 centimeters (four feet) away, Venus would be 225 centimeters
    (7.5 feet) away, Earth would be 315 centimeters (10.5 feet) distant,
    Mars would be 480 centimeters (sixteen feet) away, Jupiter would be
    1,650 centimeters (55 feet) from the Sun (at the pitcher's mound),
    Saturn would be 3,030 centimeters (101 feet) away (near second base, 
    and the last planet in the infield), Uranus would be 6,075 centimeters
    (202.5 feet) away, Neptune would be 9,540 centimeters (318 feet) away,  
    and Pluto would be 12,615 centimeters (420.5 feet) distant from the 
    Sun, deep in the outfield.

        To compare planetary diameters, if the Sun were the size of an 
    average beachball, then Jupiter would be a golf ball, Saturn a Ping-
    Pong ball, Uranus and Neptune marbles, Mercury and Pluto pinheads, 
    and Venus, Earth, and Mars would be about half the size of tackheads.

        The next comparison scale comes from the "Life on Other Worlds" 
    section of Carl Sagan's PLANETS, LIFE Science Library, 1966.  This
    one depicts the solar system on a map of Europe and Africa, with the 
    average distance between the Sun and Earth, 150 million kilometers 
    (93 million miles) - also known as one Astronomical Unit (A.U.) -
    now equaling 240 kilometers (150 miles).  If the Sun were situated 
    in Norway, Saturn would orbit just south of Italy, and Pluto would 
    be 10,400 kilometers (6,500 miles) away along the Cape of Good Hope 
    in South Africa.

        The next source on various celestial scales comes from THE
    STARFLIGHT HANDBOOK: A PIONEER'S GUIDE TO INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL, by
    Eugene F. Mallove and Gregory L. Matloff (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
    York, 1989, ISBN 0-471-61912-4, hardcover), which gives the following
    description on page 5:  If the Sun were the size of a one-centimeter
    (0.4-inch) marble, then Earth would be 0.1 millimeters (0.004 inches)
    in diameter and one meter (39.37 inches) from the Sun.  The planet
    Pluto would orbit 42 meters (139 feet) from the Sun, and Proxima
    Centauri - the Sun's nearest stellar neighbor - would be 292
    kilometers (175 miles) away. 

        The next two books listed are both authored by Neil McAleer.
    The first is THE COSMIC MIND-BOGGLING BOOK (Warner Books, Inc.,
    New York, 1982, ISBN 0-446-37932-8, paperback).  On the front cover 
    of the book, the following comparison is made (one of my favorites,
    from an aesthetic point of view):  If the solar system out to the
    orbit of Pluto could fit in a coffee cup, the Milky Way Galaxy
    would be the size of the North American continent.

        On page xiii - If you had a specially-designed automobile
    which could handle the rigors of spaceflight, it would take you
    201 billion years to "drive" from the Sun to the center of the
    Milky Way Galaxy at 161 kilometers per hour (100 miles per hour).
    Also, if the solar system were 2.54 centimeters (one inch) across, 
    the Milky Way Galaxy would be 161,000 kilometers (100,000 miles) wide.

        On pages 3-4 - If the Sun were the size of a sixty-centimeter
    (two-foot) beachball, Earth would be the size of a pea and 6,450
    centimeters (215 feet) away.  The planet Jupiter would be a large
    orange 31,680 centimeters (1,056 feet) distant from the Sun.

        On pages 12-13 - If the Sun were a 14-centimeter (5-inch) orange, 
    Earth would be a sesame seed fifteen meters (49 feet) away.  Pluto
    would be the size of a grain of millet six hundred meters (3,400
    feet) away, and the star Alpha Centauri would be four thousand 
    kilometers (2,500 miles) from the Sun.

        On page 83 - If you could fly a specially modified Boeing 747
    jetliner through space at 965 kilometers per hour (six hundred miles
    per hour), it would take you 1,903 years to fly from the orbit of
    the planet Uranus out to the orbit of Neptune.    

        On page 128 - If the Sun were a basketball in New York City, 
    then Alpha Centauri would be another basketball eight thousand
    kilometers (five thousand miles) away in Honolulu, Hawaii.

        On page 129 - If you traveled at the speed which the APOLLO
    spacecraft used in an average six-day round-trip journey to Earth's 
    Moon (approximately 40,000 kilometers per hour/25,000 miles per hour), 
    it would take you 850,000 years to reach Alpha Centauri.  By contrast, 
    the faster PIONEER 10 and 11 and VOYAGER 1 and 2 Jovian probes will 
    reach that distance (4.3 light years) in only eighty thousand years.

        On page 161 - If you used a starship traveling at one-tenth the 
    speed of light (300,000 kilometers per second/186,000 miles per second)
    to reach the farthest star in the Milky Way Galaxy, the ship would
    take 800,000 years to reach it from the Sun.  If one Astronomical 
    Unit (A.U.) - the distance between the Sun and Earth, which is 
    roughly 150 million kilometers/93 million miles - were reduced to 
    2.54 centimeters (one inch), then that farthest star would be
    127,000 kilometers (79,000 miles) away.

        The next selection is from the other Neil McAleer book, THE 
    MIND-BOGGLING UNIVERSE (Doubleday & Co. Inc., Garden City, New 
    York, 1987, ISBN 0-385-23039-7, paperback):

        On pages 10-11 - If the solar system out to Pluto were 2.54 
    centimeters (one inch) in diameter, then the center of the Milky
    Way Galaxy would be 609 kilometers (379 miles) away.  Also, to
    walk one A.U. at five kilometers per hour (three miles per hour)
    would take 3,500 years.  To drive one light year at 88 kilometers
    per hour (55 miles per hour) would take 12.2 million years.

        On page 15 - The Milky Way Galaxy's longest spiral arm of gas, 
    dust, and stars is 125,000 light years long.  It would take an
    automobile driving at 88 kilometers per hour (55 miles per hour)
    1.5 trillion years to cover that distance. 

        On page 35 - An automobile driving at 88 kph (55 mph) would
    take 52 million years to reach Proxima Centauri from the Sun.

        The next selection comes from THE UNIVERSE...AND BEYOND by 
    Terence Dickinson (Camden House Publishing, Ltd., Camden East,
    Ontario, Canada, 1986, ISBN 0-920656-48-X, paperback):

        On pages 16-19 - If the actual distance between the Milky Way 
    Galaxy and the Andromeda Galaxy (two million light years) were shrunk 
    to a typical book-reading distance, then the most remote galaxies
    known would be 1.6 kilometers (one mile) away.

        If the Sun were shrunk to the size of a 2.54-centimeter (one 
    inch) Ping-Pong ball, Earth would become a dust speck 240 centimeters 
    (eight feet) away, with the Moon being an even smaller speck just
    6.25 millimeters (0.25-inch) from Earth.  Jupiter would be a pea 
    1,200 centimeters (forty feet) from the Sun, and Pluto is a dust
    speck nine thousand centimeters (three hundred feet) away.  The
    Oort Cloud of comets surrounding our solar system would be the 
    size of atomic particles and reside several kilometers distant,
    with the comets themselves averaging several meters apart from
    each other.  The Alpha Centauri trinary star system would consist
    of two walnuts (Alpha and Beta) and a pea (Proxima) 640 kilometers
    (four hundred miles) from our solar system.

        If Earth's solar orbit were reduced to the size of a United
    States dime, the average distance between stars is now a little 
    over one kilometer (1.6 miles).  The Milky Way Galaxy would be
    the actual size of Earth.  The distance to the Andromeda Galaxy 
    would be over half the actual distance between Earth and the Moon.

        If you could hold the Milky Way Galaxy in your hand, the stars
    in it would be sub-atomic in size, and the Andromeda Galaxy would
    be 210 centimeters (seven feet) away.

        My final textbook selection comes from CYCLES OF FIRE, by 
    William K. Hartmann and Ron Miller (Workman Publishing, New York,
    1987, ISBN 0-89480-502-9, paperback):

        On pages 14-15 - If Earth were the diameter of a microparticle
    of soot, then the Sun would be one hundred times larger, the size
    of a mote of dust, or one hundredth of a millimeter across.  The
    solar system would be the size of a saucer, and the Oort Cloud of
    comets would exist several house lots away.  Alpha Centauri would
    be another dust mote one to two city blocks from the Sun, and the
    Milky Way Galaxy would be the size of North America.  Some of the
    other nearby galaxies would be the varying sizes and distances of
    Earth's continents.  The known limits of the Universe would stretch
    halfway across the solar system.

        My friend and co-worker Drew LePage came up with some various
    calculations on the celestial distance scale:

        If the orbit of Pluto were the size of a U.S. dime, this would be
    the size of various distances in the Universe: 
    
    	Earth's orbit would have a diameter of about 0.5 millimeter (about 
    half the thickness of a dime).
    
    	One light year would be about 15.2 meters (49.9 feet).
    
    	One parsec (3.26 light years) would be about 49.7 meters (163 feet).
    
    	The closest star would be 65.4 meters (214 feet) away.
    
    	The closest one hundred known stars would be inside a sphere about 
    640 meters (2,100 feet) across.
    
    	The Sun would be 456 kilometers (283 miles) from the center of the 
    Milky Way Galaxy.
    
    	The Milky Way Galaxy would be 1,520 kilometers (945 miles) across.
    
        To put intergalatic distances into perspective, if the Milky Way
    Galaxy were the size of a dime:
    
    	The orbit of Pluto would be about the size of a hydrogen atom.

    	The Andromeda Galaxy would be 41.8 centimeters (16.5 inches) away.

    	One megaparsec would equal 61.9 centimeters (2.03 feet).
            
        The recently discovered "Wall" of Galaxies would be about 40 meters 
    (125 feet) to 60 meters (190 feet) away, about 3 meters (10 feet) thick, 
    and extend for at least 100 meters (300 feet). 
    
    	The most distant quasar known would be about 2.6 kilometers 
    (1.7 miles) away.
    
        The size of the observable Universe would be about 5.7 kilometers
    (3.5 miles) across. 

        If nothing else, these figures should give some idea as to just
     how incredibly vast the known Universe is.

        Larry Klaes  klaes@wrksys.dec.com
		     or - ...!decwrl!wrksys.dec.com!klaes
    		     or - klaes%wrksys.dec@decwrl.dec.com
                     or - klaes@wrksys.enet.dec.com
                     or - klaes%wrksys.enet.dec.com@uunet.uu.net

             N = R*fgfpneflfifaL
      

- --------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Relative distances and sizes in the Universe.

In article <8912121730.AA22210@decwrl.dec.com> klaes@wrksys.dec.com
(CUP/ASG, MLO5-2/G1 6A, 223-3283  12-Dec-1989 1233) writes:
>    If the solar system out to the
>    orbit of Pluto could fit in a coffee cup, the Milky Way Galaxy
>    would be the size of the North American continent.
>
>    Also, if the solar system were 2.54 centimeters (one inch) across, 
>    the Milky Way Galaxy would be 161,000 kilometers (100,000 miles) wide.

These two don't jibe.  One inch is smaller than a coffee cup, but 161,000
km is definitely larger than North America.  The proper ratios (using 4.2
light hours and 100,000 light years) is one to about 200 million, and 208
million inches is 3156 miles, so the coffe cup vs North America analogy is
the "correct" one.  The ratio of 1 inch to 100,000 miles is about the ratio
of the *Earth's* orbit to the Galaxy.

	Other than that, the article was fascinating.  I've often tried
to convey to friends the vastness of the solar system alone, and then
the galaxy... and the Universe... Some of the analogies wowed me yet again.
Gosh, this is a BIG place.

- -- 
The 'C' programming language is, at worst, the second best language for any
given application.  Usually, however, it is the best.  --  anon

Wayne Hayes	INTERNET: wayne@csri.toronto.edu	CompuServe: 72401,3525



All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #753 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 753
From: (Bertil Jonell) d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Re: How long can your fleet endure?
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 89 9:52:25 MET DST


Richard Johnson writes:
> 	[About resupply during Carrier operations]

About resupply in Traveller Naval Operations:

This would be a major problem in extended naval operations ranging over
a Sector or more. It is alleviated somewhat by the use of pure-energy
weapons whose only reqirements are power from the powerplant (and in some
cases: hydrogen from the tanks). Hydrogen is free for taking at your
friendly neighbourhood gasgiant (in most cases). 
The trouble is the material munitions (missiles, sandcannisters etc). 
Those weapons is popular because they give more "Bang for the MegaWatts"
Their disadvantage is their limited ammo and the need to bring extra ammo
along. Supposedly on large, armored cargoships.
Other material things a fleet will need is spareparts, spare crew and
recharges for the life-support systems. Some of this can be carried on
the warships but the main part of the supplys will be stored on supplyships.
The supplyships will either follow the fleet or travel between it and a source
of supply (Naval Depot or Industrial world with TL 14+ can supply everything
a fleet need (except perhaps life-support recharges) but these can be found
on any Agricultural world regardless of TL).
If the supplyships are to follow the fleet there have to be a large number
of them to guarantee that the supplys will last until the next supplyrun
to a planet. This large number of ships is a tempting target and must be
protected.
If the method of continous supplys are adopted the major problem involves
finding the fleet. Information flows with the same speed as the fleet moves
(1 jump per week) so when the supplyships arrive they might find that the
fleet has been chased away and that the enemy now holds that system.
One approach to this problem is using predesignated meetingpoints that the
fleet will jump to to be supplyed. These points might not even be in systems,
they might just be coordinates in deep space. 

These problems with supply will lead to a preferrence for pure energy weapons
(Lasers, PA's, Fusionguns, Plasmaguns, Mesonguns, Disintegrators, Repulsors
and all kinds of screens) in forces that are not geared towards pure defence-
missions. Likewise a planetary invasion force will equipp themselves with 
as big proportion of laser and enery weapons and possible. The troops will
have lasers, FGMPs and PGMPs, and the vehicles will only use munitionusing
weapons in specific circumstances. (VRF GaussGuns).
The planetary defenders, on the other hand, may defend with every kind of
weapon imaginable: missiles, artillery, massdrivers, rocketlaunchers etc
*in addition* to the normal spectrum of weapons.

Planetary invasions are even more supplyconsuming than "pure" space battles.
There is a need for troops, landingcrafts, combat vehicles, recon drones,
decoys, weapons for the troops, ammo for all kinds of weapons, bombs for
defence supression, food for the troops, etc etc.
All this will require continous supplymission out of the system. Harrased
by hiding SDB's and Commerse Raiders and disturbed by the largescale fighting
that might still go on in the subsector.

All this condenses to: It's easier to defend than to attack.
The defender might have large stashes of supplys hidden beforehand in systems
and deep space while the attacker must bring everything with him. In any case
the defender will have shorter supplyruns than the attacker.
In the case of planetary sieges and invasions this advantage for the defender
is even more pronounced and will in some cases outweigh the tactical advantage
of "holding the high ground" that the attacker has.

> 	The AOEs were huge. THe main deck was at about the same level
> 	as the hanger deck, which made unrep a little easier. They were
> 	almost as long as the carrier. There were at least two fuel lines
> 	and four cargo lines between ships.  The AOE also had a helicopter
> 	pad aft and a hanger for two CH-46s (I'm not sure about the type,
> 	it had two rotors fore & aft). The helicopters would take the light
> 	stuff to the flight deck.

Supplyships will probably be very large. 50 000 tons and larger. If the fleet 
is forced to bring it's own fuel it would also contain several 1 000 000 tons
fleet tankers. Other supplyships that can be found in a fleet are big refinerys
that produces pure fuel for those ships that lack their own plants, And also
a mobile repaircenter of 500 000 tons that provides extra repair facilies.

> 	Mostly we took on bombs. After 2+ hours there would be bombs and
> 	bomb finn pallets everywhere; in the magazines (full), the mess decks,
> 	the hanger deck, and the starboard side of the island on the
> 	roof. 

I would imagine that a IMC Landingship or a IN Destroyer also would
look something like that at the start of a long mission. All available
space occupied by supplys. Ammo, spareparts and Liquid Oxygen bottles stacked
in all passageways, recreation rooms, and even in the cabins.

"Sarge, do I really have to have 200 kg of explosives stored under my bed?" :-)

- -bertil-
- -- 
Bertil K K Jonell @ Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg
NET: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se 
VOICE: +46 31 723971 / +46 300 61004     "Don't worry,I've got Pilot-7"
SNAILMAIL: Box 154,S-43900 Onsala,SWEDEN      (Famous last words)      
"And so for more than a decade Tiamat had been observing Lucifer with 
every possible kind of instrumentation" A.C.Clarke "2061: Odyssey Three"

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #754 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 754
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 89 20:43:34 EST
From: (Greg Givler - PA) givler@cbmvax.commodore.COM
Subject: Re: How long can your fleet endure?


Bertil K K Jonell writes:

>Supplyships will probably be very large. 50 000 tons and larger. If the fleet 
>is forced to bring it's own fuel it would also contain several 1 000 000 tons
>fleet tankers. Other supplyships that can be found in a fleet are big refinerys
>that produces pure fuel for those ships that lack their own plants, And also
>a mobile repaircenter of 500 000 tons that provides extra repair facilies.

I seem to remember that in Fifth Frontier War, although I haven't played it in 
years, that there was a provision for tankers. This was a necessity if you jump
into a system that does not have a Gas Giant to refuel at. Otherwise you were 
stuck in system until you conquered it, then you could refuel from the planet.

Greg

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Givler                        | Q-Link: GregGivler
Analyst - Systems Evaluation Group | CompuServe: Greg Givler 76702,647
Commodore Product Assurance        | GEnie: G.Givler
215-431-9100                       | The NET: givler@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Wild Whores couldn't keep me away!" -- George Fransisco
"That's Horses, George" -- Matt Sikes -- Alien Nation --  Fox Broadcasting --
===============================================================================


All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #755 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 755
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 89 11:50:19 EST
From: ("Alvin M. Chan") ugachan@cs.buffalo.edu
Subject: a use for supplyships



If you have to bounce into a system to wage a planetary (or multi-planetary)
attack, then after you have a supplyship come in (possibly even of a size
small enought to service one ship, like a cruiser), then how about
DISMANTLING the supplyship and using it for spare parts, like the armor, the
electronics, etc.  The suppplyship would be built kind of modularly.

Other larger supply ships can warp in, then warp out when they are empty.

I dunno, I kinda of got the idea from reading "Common Denominator" by
David Lewis, in the October 1972 Analog.  I've read more sci-fi
in these mag/books than I ever read in paperback/hardcover/anthology form.
The amount of science facts (in the science columns) exceeds the amount of
knowledge I learned sitting through my physics and mechanics classes too!
Only problem is I guess I should be studying right now instead of reading
the fun stuff!

	- Alv

           Alvin M. Chan -- SUNY at Buffalo - Philosophy ==> Real Life
   +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  / Internet: ugachan@cs.buffalo.edu     /     Bitnet: acscamc@ubvms.bitnet /
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #756 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 756
From: (Adrian Hurt) adrian%cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Subject: Re: How long can your fleet endure?
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 89 10:27:19 BST


One solution to the problem of re-supplying warships is the use of supply
ships which hide at some secret location.  In WW2, the German commerce
raiders did this.  Their supply ships were fast, armed tankers.  They
would be at a pre-arranged point, at a pre-arranged time.  One such point,
code-named "Andalusia", was used regularly.  The supply ships brought
ammo, foodstuffs and spare parts, and sometimes took away prisoners of war.

In a Traveller campaign, suitable places could include systems whose main
world is too low tech to be able to scan the whole system for intruders;
systems with no population; or empty hexes.  The last of these would, of
course, require two additional jumps to use, and would only really be of
use for transferring large quantities of ammo or spare parts.  Refuelling
really is only practical with tankers which accompany the fleet (as in the
board game "Fifth Frontier War"), from captured territory, or from gas
giants.  The boardgame says the system must contain no hostile, active
ships if you are to use the gas giant.  High Guard says that refuelling
while enemy ships are around is risky, which is why some ships stay outside
the gas giant to cover those ships refuelling - they are the High Guard.

Another source is raided enemy shipping.  One German warship, the "pocket
battleship" Admiral Scheer, captured a British refridgerator ship named
Duquesa.  The Scheer never went short of fresh food, especially eggs, for
the rest of the voyage!

Has anyone else considered making an adventure campaign out of the exploits
of a commerce raider?  I did so once, using FASA's Chameleon class raider.
The players came unstuck - they kept using the ship's missiles when they
could have just used its secondary weapons, lasers and particle accelerators.
When they ran into serious trouble, they were just about out of missiles!

Merry Christmas, everyone!

 "Keyboard? How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian     |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #757 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 757
Subject: Re: How long can your fleet endure? 
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 89 11:37:31 PST
From: (Leonard Erickson) leonard@tessi.UUCP


Actually, as some of us pointed out during the discussion of "odball" objects
(black holes, brown dwarfs, etc) there may be a lot of stuff out in those
"empty" hexes. If a survey team can locate a comet-like object, that will
refuel a *lot* of ships. Figure the tonnage of a ball of ice (water, methane,
and ammonia) a few klicks across. 

The location of such covert refueling stations would be closely guarded as
while there are a lot of such iceballs out there, they are *not* easy to 
find. But what is it worth to you to have a refueling depot in interstellar
space? Better yet, what if it's a few light hours outside an enemy system?

In peacetime only covert operations would use these resources. In wartime
a skipper might open his sealed orders to find that he is to jump to some
location in empty space. After arriving, he'd be met by a pilot who'd take
the ship in. (If the crew is kept away from the nav readouts, only the pilot
knows how they got from the jump point to the fuel depot... paranoia pays!)


All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #758 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 758
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 89 10:46:06 PST
From: gazis@halley.arc.nasa.gov
Subject: wheeze... gasp... endurance in the... pant pant... Eight Worlds...


[This came to traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com, looks like it was
meant for traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com.  Watch those automatic reply
headers.  BTW, enjoyable and very humorous article! Oh, and everyone
have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year (Yes, I'll still be kicking
around the mail spool over break) -- James]

ENDURANCE

     Mission endurance obviously depends on opperational level.
There are three levels of opperational activity; these levels
are common to ALL GAMES, not merely the Eight Worlds.  These
levels are as follows:

     1) Tactical.  The ship is engaged in actual combat; it is
under acceleration, weapons are being fired, shields (if any) are
up, sensors are active, crew is running from place to place in
an excited and agitated fashion as the ship crumbles to bits.
     2) Strategic.  The ship is not engaged in actual combat; it 
either on station or it is in transit in a fashion calulated to
maximize endurance, weapons are secured, shields (if any) are down, 
sensors are running in a passive mode, and the crew is cruising 
around looking for dates.
     3) Derelict.  The ships drifts, lifeless and inert, utterly
empty except for the evil power that destroyed it, which power
STILL WAITS to... but I digress.

     Intermediate opperational levels are certainly possible.  A 
vessel on blockade duty (or a carrier performing flight ops in
Southeast Asia) might occupy a level intermediate between Tactical
and Strategic.  My old MGB frequently occupied a level intermediate 
between Strategic and Derelict, which is three successive car thieves
were unable to make off with it.  Why, they wondered, didn't it start?
The fools, the cylinder head assembly on the passenger seat should 
have been a clue.  But again I digress... where was I... oh yes:

     All three of these opperational states are extremely important
in a Role Playing Game.
     Tactical endurance is a crucial aspect of combat.  PCs who do not 
know the combat endurance of their ship will routinely run out of fuel 
at inappropriate moments.  They will then die, to the dismay of their 
players, who will have to roll up new characters.  If this happens on a 
frequent basis, the players will have to roll their dice so many times
that the corners will wear off.  The dice will then tend to roll off the 
table and under the sofa, a frustrating occurance.
     Strategic endurance limits the range and duration of missions.  
PCs who exceed these limits will run out of fuel and die, to the dismay
of... but you've heard this already.
     Derelict endurance determines just how long wrecks can be expected
to last.  This is important because every self-respecting RPG has a few
derelict vessels which drift, dark, cold, Empty Except For The Evil Power,
Etc.  Many non-self-respecting RPGs will also contain such items.  If
adandoned ships generally fall out of orbit after a few years (or more
likely, drift off into deep space on hyperbolic trajectories on which 
they are unlikley to be found), then a truly ancient wreck is BIG NEWS.  
It is implausible.  The PC's may become suspicious.  They might well 
detect the Evil Power, Etc. before it is too late.  If, on the other hand,
ancient wrecks are commonplace, no one will ever bother to explore them.
In either situation, the Evil Power, Etc. that the GM has worked so long 
and hard to create will be wasted, a sorry fate.  For this reason, the
GM will wish to arrange matters so that ancient wrecks, while plausible, 
are also rare enough to be tantalizing.

     The situation in the Eight Worlds:
     The Eight Worlds, as I have suggested before, is an abysmally low
tech universe.  Even today, we can build spacecraft that in many 
respects are superior to those used in the Eight Worlds.  (They are also 
much more expensive and do not have hyperdrive.  These can only be 
considered to be flaws).
    The Tactical Endurance of Eight Worlds ships is measured in hours.
In order to economize on hours (a valuable substance), it is sometimes
even measured in fractions of an hour.  The chief reason for this 
limitation is fuel, which is consumed at a discouraging rate.  Another
reason is the crew, who tend to die, after which they can no longer
opperate the ship or repair damage.
     The Strategic Endurance of Eight Worlds ships is measured in days.
The superficial source of this limitation is the lifesystem: after a week 
or so, the air begins to smell bad, the output of the food machines is
indistinguishable from the input to the waste reprocessing facility,
and the walls become a garden to delight any connoiseur of fungii.  More
capable lifesystems are possible.  These are also prohibatively expensive
and do not address the more fundamental limitation of volume: Eight Worlds 
ships are very small, not much larger than a modern airliner.  Would YOU 
want to live aboard a modern airliner for more than a week?  If your 
answer is yes, go to the local video store, rent a copy of DAS BOOT, watch 
it, and think again.
     The Derelict Endurance of Eight Worlds ships is, of course, quite
long.  These ships are not going to evaporate, they are made out of nice
durable materials such as steel (Why not?  It's cheap and it doen't burn.
These are valuable characteristics.  Oh, there may also be an aeroshell
of some refractory material but this is a cosmetic item: it merely 
insures that the vessel does not become disfigured during re-entry).
On the other hand, they are not likely to remain where they can be
found.  Since most ship opperations (and all combat) are conducted at 
speeds greater than typical planetary escape velocities, derelicts
tend to spin off into interplanetary or interstellar space.  The
detection range of Eight Worlds sensors is a paltry 300,000 km or so.  
Interplanetary space is somewhat larger than this.

     The discerning individual will wonder why I chose such endurance
limits.  He or she will wonder on what physical justification these
limits are based.  The answer is simple:
     I am, of course, far to lazy and unimaginative to create a truly
civilization.  I therefore elected to take a historical civilization and 
transpose its culture and technology into SF terms.  But I did not wish 
to chose a well-known civilization lest my players exclaim, "My my, Gazis 
has based this culture on the aboriginal societies of Papua, New Guinea,"
and laugh at me.  Fortunately, I have long been fascinated by the
civilizations of the ancient Mediterranean.  These civilizations were
defined by their shipping, which shipping had important limitations. 
(These civilizations also were centered around self-sufficient city-states,
which are a good analogue for planetary states.)  It was a simple matter
to devise specific impulses, specific power outputs, and reactor 
efficiencies so that Eight Worlds shipping had analogous limitations.
     Unfortunately... I goofed.  There is another historical 
civilization which placed great importance on its navies, and possessed
ships with endurances such as I have described:
     European civilization at the turn of the century.  
     Space 1909.  Ick.

     The two messages are, as always:

     1) Opperating limitations, like every thing else in a game, should
be consitent with the kind of campaign the GM wants to run.  
     2) I forgot what the second message was

Cap'n Paul

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #759 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 759
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 89 12:18:05 -0500
From: (Mark Gellis) f3w@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Subject: Fleets, endurance, etc.



Interesting article from Paul and others prompted this commentary.
Please use any ideas you find interesting and/or suitable.

Strategic endurance on my spacecraft is limited by three factors: fuel,
life support, and power.  Life support is actually the least important
of the three.  My traveller world is set far in the future, and most
of the many alien races humans deal with are even older (like millions
of years) than humanity, which has only had a mere fifty thousand years
to perfect various technologies.  While I do assume some limits on
technology, I believe you could get microtechnology-biotechnology life
support units that could support humans pretty much for years if they
have power (I assume your basic recycler tank masses 500 kg. and uses
about 5 kilowatts and will work pretty much forever as long as you give
it fluids and solids and gases to recycle and power to help run things; 
it's basically an organism of sorts, producing water and foodbars, nothing
fancy.)

Power is not too much of a problem, either.  While a fusion generator
will run out of deuterium after a while, you can pack about two years 
worth into any power plant.  Probably more.  

Ah, but fuel, even in super-efficient systems like a fusion drive or 
a matter-antimatter drive, is the big problem.  Run out of fuel and
something very bad happens--you can't turn around!  You don't run out
of power and die (well, not for a while) but you do float off and have
to wait for someone to rescue you (someone will, spacecraft are valuable
enough that salvage teams can change outrageous fees for chasing after
people who have run out of fuel and need to be rescued).  Most spacecraft
carry between 400 and 800 G-hours of fuel (i.e., hours of fuel at one
gravity of thrust).  Now, even if you use jump drives, this means you
have to be careful.  In my game, where people have to use hypergates
(like Stargates in 2001; ships don't carry their own hyperdrives, they
have to go to a hypergate for interstellar transport), you have to be
very careful.

You also have to be careful about what you plan to do.  If you whiz by
an enemy fleet at a thouand klicks per second, relative speed, you'll get 
a few shots, but then they're gone and it will be quite some time before
you can slow down, turn around, and chase them!  So you need good 
intelligence to tell you where to navigate.  (Mind you, sometimes it's
better to do a fast hit-and-run ambush, but not always.)

I have never worried too much about tactical endurance, except for missiles
and chaff (anti-missile confuse-their-scanners junk).  Everything else is
energy weapons.  Waste heat is a problem, but unless both sides are commanded
by total boobs, one side has usually anihilated the other side within a few
minutes (like naval warfare today, spacecraft will probably carry weapons 
where the main gun is big enough to waste anything their own size in one or
two shots--the only exception being battleships which are so big that no 
one shot short of a nuclear blast can destroy the entire thing).

This leads to a new topic of discussion.  As I recall, the old Traveller
space combat tables are very slow.  I have developed a system which, in 
the words of one friend who plays in my game is "brutal, but fair, and 
pretty realistic."  Gaming combat time almost equals playing time, minute
for minute.  What do people think of the various space combat systems
they have encountered, developed, etc.?

Well, I've babbled enough.  Take care everyone, and have happy holidays!

    Mark

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #760 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 760
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 89 20:18:16 +0100
From: ("Hans Rancke-Madsen.") rancke@diku.dk
Subject: Type SN Scoutship


In White Dwarf #70 there is an article about bounty hunting as
a career in Traveller. Included is the floor-plans of a variant
scoutship especially equipped for bounty hunters. It's a very
nice, very professionally looking floorplan labeled "TYPE H
HUNTER (SN VARIANT)". The explanations, however, are in terms
of the differences from the standard model, and I've never seen
the plans for that! Does anyone know if these plans have been
published anywhere? There's a few issues in the twenties
missing from my White Dwarf collection, so that might be it.

The article was written by Diane and Richard John, and I think
they made the plans in it themselves, so probably they also did
the original plans, but I don't know for sure.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk

(And, yes, if this dosen't work, I'll try writing the Johns
care of White Dwarf).

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- End of TML Messages --------

